catia_remove_face

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description adds the healing behavior ('let CATIA heal the result by extending the neighbouring faces'), which is valuable extra context. It does not disclose permission requirements, reversibility, or error behavior, but given the annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and feature name. The additional use-case note is brief and useful. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the purpose and a high-level behavior, but for a destructive operation with no output schema, it omits what happens on failure, whether faces_to_keep and faces_to_remove interact, and how reference tokens are obtained (though sibling tools like catia_list_faces would provide them). It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent deciding to invoke it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema provides 100% description coverage for all three parameters (name, faces_to_keep, faces_to_remove), each with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (delete faces) and the resource (solid), and names the CATIA feature 'Remove Face'. It provides a specific use case (simplifying before analysis/export). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like catia_shell or catia_split_body, which also remove geometry, so it misses a chance to disambiguate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions a general use case ('useful for simplifying a model before analysis or export') but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions (e.g., when faces are not removable or when other operations would be preferred). The usage context is implied rather than stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.